Yeah, I had no problem with his previous Twitter "scandal" of dropping f-bombs. "Whore" is over the line because it's sexist and marginalizes sex workers, but if he hadn't used that word, this wouldn't be a problem for me either.

That said, you should hear what I call the Harper Conservatives... ;)

Don't really like Pat Martin's politics - he's too right-wing for me. But every once in a while he makes me stand up and cheer. I wish this could have been one of those times. I don't mind rage so much, but sexist epithets used in a rage are unacceptable.

I had just finished posting a you tube vid with a blue rat in it...and heard the news and said ..at least he conveys what some think ..maybe with too much color in his words but he conveys the anger a lot of people feel..Maybe he should pick up an instruement to let some frustration out..I like the guitar, wife likes drums..

Here is a new vid for Pat Martin to enjoy..He is not alone in his anger and frustration over the Cons

It is about inappropriate language. The Missing Women Inquiry proved that "rat faced whores" get no respect. That kind of language feeds into the systemic racism that plagues the city he represents because it dehumanizes women in an attempt to insult a privileged man.

Well he used inappropriate language, and it is entirely in order for people to call him on it, especially given his position.

But I doubt the musing about his future is all over the use of that word, nor even the inference that it might be a sign of a deeper misogyny.

I'd say it has more to do with his existing record of being a loose cannon and attracting the wrong kind of attention - even though there seem to be plenty of people who like his vulgar way of speaking his mind.

Your right 6979 systemic misogyny is one of those things that is a marginal issue. Nothing to see there lets look somewhere else. You are so insightful. We should all pay way more attention to the views of the Homer's of this world since they love the vulgar and progressive change is all about dumbing down the debate until it fits within the norms of a MSM audience. I don't know why anyone would want to post somewhere that divergent opinions are expressed when the majority of Canadians do not agree.

I doubt he'll be forced to resign, but regardless, this isn't about "naughty" language.

I agree with you there, but I'd also say it is more about drawing bad attention and appearing to be out of control than it is about compliance with a moral code.

That's not to say that people are wrong to call him on his use of language, but in terms of actual consequences for those words, I don't see that going anywhere.

If this were an isolated incident I don't think he'd be hanging up his mouse.

Exactly. The problem is that the "natural base" of the NDP is also the most difficult to motivate to vote. One of the reasons for this is that they find the intense partisan arguing too much to stomach, and incidents like these only prove these people correct, that "they're all a bunch of crooks," and they stop paying attention. It's for that reason that the standard of behaviour for NDP MPs has to be perfect, if not higher. That's why Jack was very big on having the Caucus act in a civil fashion.

Your right 6979 systemic misogyny is one of those things that is a marginal issue.

I didn't say the issue of misogyny was marginal, nor that the use of inappropriate language shouldn't be criticized.

I said that I don't think that's the real reason Martin has stopped using twitter, and that questions are being raised about his conduct. This is a far more longstanding problem.. one I agree needs to be dealt with.

And while no, I don't think Martin's choice of words was justified, I do think it is significant that some people feel he speaks for them. I don't see their input as dumbing down any more than any other situation where someone has had enough and feels there is no other means of expressing outrage.

And whether the expression is wrong or not... those peoples' grievances and welfare ARE our concern.

I do think it is significant that some people feel he speaks for them. I don't see their input as dumbing down any more than any other situation where someone has had enough and feels there is no other means of expressing outrage.

And whether the expression is wrong or not... those peoples' grievances and welfare ARE our concern.

I disagree completely. Not all grievances are my concern. I am not worried about white peoples grievances against nasty Indians who blockade, I am not worried about grievances of men's rights movements when they claim feminism is the cause of their problems. I do not support misogynist MP's and the louts who cheer lead them on. All those views are seen on MSM forums and no they are not my concern. I am not worried about their "grievances" because their grievances are self centered demands to view the world from their narrow perspective. You can concern yourself with anything you want but please don't include the rest of us. I for instance don't have any concern for the kind of people who feel Vic Toews speaks for them. Why should louts who support Pat Martin in his unintentional misogyny be my concern except to do what I did which is to call women hating language what it is. You seem to be prescribing letting the louts world view prevail because after all their warped grievances and privilaged welfare should be my concern.

Good thing I didn't make an admission like Michellle did at #12, or I'd be one of your louts and Homers like her too. Though frankly, I think she hit the nail on the head.

And yes, I think we are going to have to disagree. "Whore" is a difficult and inappropriate word. But my reaction was more to say "what the fuck was he thinking" rather than to equate it with all the extremes that you have.

And that's why I think this has more to do with his recklessness (and in particular not really learning from that lawsuit) than his use of that misogynist word, or even the fact that he is seen by some as on the right of the party.

Yes, he should give his head a shake and think about this, but to question whether he and others belong in the same social movement as me (and I think that sentiment is being implied here) is not really my business, and an exercise that is more likely to wind up with me sitting in a closet alone.

And personally, I still oppose the Harperites' changes to justice and cuts to prisons, even though I suspect some of the people in those institutions hold attitudes I would find extremely offensive. If social justice only means justice for me and my friends, it ain't really justice, is it?

Yeah, I had no problem with his previous Twitter "scandal" of dropping f-bombs. "Whore" is over the line because it's sexist and marginalizes sex workers, but if he hadn't used that word, this wouldn't be a problem for me either.

That said, you should hear what I call the Harper Conservatives... ;)

Don't really like Pat Martin's politics - he's too right-wing for me. But every once in a while he makes me stand up and cheer. I wish this could have been one of those times. I don't mind rage so much, but sexist epithets used in a rage are unacceptable.

I don't know what your talking about 6079 since i agree with Michelle's post. I've bolded the parts I like the most. Her point does not bolster your argument and your suggestion that I would attack her post or her for posting it is just another fantasy from your vivid imagination.

A few years ago I was not even aware that misogyny is a word in the dictionary. And I would be surprised to know that the average Canadian is as socially clued-in as the average babbler. That's a scary thought for most of us here, but I get the strong impression that it is reality across Canada. And I think we can all agree that FPTP elections in Canada are not chess matches between Nordic type political parties offering slightly more to voters than the NDP can afford to under the circumstances. Elections in Canada are miniature versions of U.S. ones with a lot of hype and fanfare dirven by big money interests. Are big money interests all that concerned with social issues? I don't think so, and so I doubt that all of Pat Martin's offhand comments combined would matter very much in the next federal election. Our bygone era electoral system is not so finely tuned that Martin would have to fear "the electorate." Fortunately for Martin all he has to do is appear to be a better choice than the other parties candidates, which isn't saying much for the other parties.

really??? being all up in the air and wanting him to resign 'cause his words weren't "progressive" is one of the things spouted by my mom that made me cringe and turn off the NDP. i mean really???

there's not enough shit happening needing action i guess.

shakes head and wandrs off

I totally agree. It's amazing that Pat Martin should have been ordered to shut down his Twitter account because of some words he used on one occasion, for which he apologized.

In fact, he should have been thrown out of the caucus long ago for the regressive and anti-NDP stands he takes on a gamut of important issues, which I tried to summarize in the NDP #15 thread as follows:

Quote:

Pat Martin is a fanatical supporter of Israel.

He backed the "mission" in Afghanistan in open defiance of Jack Layton and the caucus.

For years he has unsuccessfully promoted a private member's bill to institute a "loyalty oath to Canada" for MPs, hoping it would trap Bloc members.

He momentarily opposed the "Youth For Christ" obscenity in his riding, then changed his mind and decided to back it fully, while local Aboriginal organizations continue to starve for lack of funding.

He falsely accused Racknine of electoral fraud, thus attracting a multi-million dollar lawsuit against the party (that's our contributions, folks).

And in his latest twitter rants, he exposed his profound disrespect for women and sex trade workers - all because his pathetic little ego was hurt because he wasn't invited to an event in his own riding.

I know I'm not the only one who is baffled at the conservative moral indignation aimed at Pat. Ask me if I would rather have a politican in cabinet with an unethical, immoral personal life, where adultery reigns, like that of Vic Toews or if I would prefer a politican who says bad words once in a while.

And how about a media that refuses to tell the Canadian public about politicans moral and ethical lapses but will fill pages of newspapers with Pat's bad words. I think that maybe the little tight world of Ottawa's political denizens should be spread out before us so we can judge the character of the people we vote for properly.

I'm not going to hold any of his comments against him at all. One just has to examine the damage done to this country by the cons to know that it's an accumulative poison and if you can't eradicate it by exposing voting irregularities that show rigging and you can't turn over the govt by force ..you only have 2 ways left ..and if bad mouthing them and degrading them publicly keeps you from going further ..so be it. Not like he is lieing or anything ..just being loud and making noise... Or one can go the idle no more route and demonstrate your heart out...yet to be seen the physical damage that may come about from that.

He probably gave in to party pressure to close the account and I can see why ..the media concentrated on comments that made him look bad and disregarded others that make the cons look bad ...so Canadian media is still in the back pockets of the cons....

Whats with the double standard ..it's ok for rappers to say ho and not ok for the rest of us to say the elongated version ..in the context of describing a repulsive political party...especially one that imports dirty filthy illegal tricks from one of there supporting parties...one that has cause the death of countless innocent people everywhere...forget it the anti Wh___ campaign has fallen on deaf ears...I think the NDP has some double agents in it's midst....and when they are rooted out I wonder what were going to call them?

He probably gave in to party pressure to close the account and I can see why ..the media concentrated on comments that made him look bad and disregarded others that make the cons look bad

So what do you think of a Party which shuts him up for using a bad word - but doesn't even blink when he spews his pro-Israel, pro-Afghan "mission", anti-Québec, pro-Youth For Christ propaganda?

Bev Oda was removed for ordering expensive orange juice - not for trying to shut down a charity that didn't toe Harper's line on the Middle East.

There were lots of good reasons to shut Pat Martin up over the years. The NDP inner circle picked the wrong one. He should have been reprimanded (which I don't even think they have had the integrity to do...), allowed to apologize (which he did), and get on with life. But his other sins have gone unnoticed.

What does it take to be pro Israel? That they are allowed to exist...lets not get to wacked out here..I'd like to know what makes him so pro Israel or Pro Afghan war......I think there is too much reading between the lines. If the cons don't like him ..that is good, and the only negative stuff on the net about Pat M. is stuff on babble....and there is nothing concrete to point too just a lot of back and forth bickering, just the way the cons like it..and old stuff too.

I don't think twitter account rhetoric should be even newsworthy ....they were even using twiiter text to make the Exos poller look bad and at this rate were heading to the Mcarthy era...I would sure hate to be the guy monitoring and copying posts from twitter.

What does it take to be pro Israel? That they are allowed to exist...lets not get to wacked out here..I'd like to know what makes him so pro Israel or Pro Afghan war.

Just look at some of his quotes over the years, and some of the organizations which he is a part of (CPCCA), to see what people are referring to. My only quibble with Unionist is that I think the term "pro-apartheid" is more accurate and meaningful than "pro-Israel," and doesn't disguise support for Israeli apartheid as some sort of legitimate and harmless political position.

As for Pat Martin, he's said things like accusing Palestinian solidarity activists of being "looney left" and "just obsessed and driven by a hatred for all things Israel and by extension the Jewish people"

Or supporting the apartheid wall, even going so far as to say that it shows a lot of "restraint" on Israel's part.

Are we this starved, on the left, for any breath of fresh air, any principled statement, any break from the boring, safe, mealy-mouthed, middle of the road empty suits that pass for NDP politicians these days, that we all stand up and cheer when a white guy uses dirty language on twitter?

I'd like to know what makes him so pro Israel or Pro Afghan war......I think there is too much reading between the lines.

Here is what he said in 2006, after the convention and the leader both had called for ìmmediate and safe withdrawal of the troops from Afghanistan:

Quote:

Another NDP MP is breaking ranks with party leader Jack Layton over Afghanistan and says Canadian troops should not be pulled out of the war-torn country immediately.

NDP MP Pat Martin (Winnipeg Centre, Man.) told The Hill Times in an exclusive interview at his party's policy convention in Québec City on the weekend that he does not support his party leader on the controversial issue.

The issue is expected to come up again at the NDP retreat in Thunder Bay, Ont., this week.

"I'm more of a Manitoba New Democrat point of view, which [is that] we don't support the idea of the immediate withdrawal of troops. The Taliban train Al-Qaeda to bomb North America and this has been the reason for the international community to try and stop the Taliban. Therefore, it's a good reason for Canada to be part of that initiative," said Mr. Martin, referring to Manitoba Premier Gary Doer's comments also on the weekend to CTV NewsNet that, "The Taliban that we're fighting basically protected the terrorists that were involved five years ago in the 9-11 attack-which included the killing of innocent victims from Manitoba-and so I don't like any anti-military talk."

Genstrike has pointed to Pat Martin's pro-Israel stand (by which I mean, genstrike, support for the policies of the Israeli regime), including his continuing membership of the ultra-right anti-Palestinian CPCCA. Being from Winnipeg (right?), he would know better than I. But all this has been canvassed over many years on babble. Sorry to have to keep repeating it, but the truth tends to get lost in the fog of war.

If you need the evidence for his Québec-bashing, just ask. If you don't think any of this is important, however, we'll have to agree to disagree.

what? we should cheer you for your observations? or entertain them as wonnderful musings?

I didn't ask to be cheered.

All I did was post a few thoughts I had, regarding seeing people in progressive circles (rabble, friends on facebook, etc) seem to stand up and cheer every time someone like Pat Martin or Peter Stoffer has a little outburst (which, as an aside, it seems like they have a bit more leeway to do because they are white males). I think one of the reasons is that we are so starved for actual content coming from the empty suits we elect that any little rant feels like a breath of fresh air.

It's a discussion board. Isn't the whole point of babble to share our thoughts and discuss them? What did I do to earn your wrath?

quizzical wrote:

imv you are just another white man on babble among many who thinks their observations about the world are the best thing ever and e1 else is a failure to the "principled cause".

Okay, I'm a white man, but where did I say that my observations about the world are the best thing ever and that everyone else is a failure? Or is it simply the fact that I'm occasionally critical of pro-apartheid public figures like Pat Martin (for which I make no apologies) that makes me into some caricature of a strident, judgemental person that you came up with.

quizzical wrote:

it's getting pretty difficult to take this site seriously what with all the i'm wonderful you're not posts or the white male pissing bees.

I don't know what this is in response to. Is it in response to me sharing my thoughts on Pat Martin's latest running of the mouth, or me pointing out why some people consider Pat Martin to be pro-war and pro-apartheid by highlighting a couple of his quotes?

okayy i gotta say "i'm sorry" genstrike". you got undeserved dumped on. i took your post in the same sphere as others i'd been reading and let it overwhelm me.

i thought wtf... Chief Spence is starving herself and Idle No More is happening which imv is one of the biggest recent events "lefties" should be able to get beside and support and all it seems people wanna do here is quibble over tweeted words and non-existant laws. or tell FNs they're behaving badly by road blocking...

i shoulda just walked away so i apologize doubly. to you and old goat.

I'd like to know what makes him so pro Israel or Pro Afghan war......I think there is too much reading between the lines.

Here is what he said in 2006, after the convention and the leader both had called for ìmmediate and safe withdrawal of the troops from Afghanistan:

Quote:

Another NDP MP is breaking ranks with party leader Jack Layton over Afghanistan and says Canadian troops should not be pulled out of the war-torn country immediately.

NDP MP Pat Martin (Winnipeg Centre, Man.) told The Hill Times in an exclusive interview at his party's policy convention in Québec City on the weekend that he does not support his party leader on the controversial issue.

The issue is expected to come up again at the NDP retreat in Thunder Bay, Ont., this week.

"I'm more of a Manitoba New Democrat point of view, which [is that] we don't support the idea of the immediate withdrawal of troops. The Taliban train Al-Qaeda to bomb North America and this has been the reason for the international community to try and stop the Taliban. Therefore, it's a good reason for Canada to be part of that initiative," said Mr. Martin, referring to Manitoba Premier Gary Doer's comments also on the weekend to CTV NewsNet that, "The Taliban that we're fighting basically protected the terrorists that were involved five years ago in the 9-11 attack-which included the killing of innocent victims from Manitoba-and so I don't like any anti-military talk."

Genstrike has pointed to Pat Martin's pro-Israel stand (by which I mean, genstrike, support for the policies of the Israeli regime), including his continuing membership of the ultra-right anti-Palestinian CPCCA. Being from Winnipeg (right?), he would know better than I. But all this has been canvassed over many years on babble. Sorry to have to keep repeating it, but the truth tends to get lost in the fog of war.

If you need the evidence for his Québec-bashing, just ask. If you don't think any of this is important, however, we'll have to agree to disagree.

OK...it looks and sounds like he is reflecting the views in his riding and Manitobans ... many people have fell sucker for the mainstream rhetoric over Afghanistan /Israel and terror... I guess being NDP he should be above that but it would be interesting to see and hear his view now..but yeah he seems to be quite outspoken for even back then ..political rookie?

He should tear up the anti Palestinian card. At the same time, I don't know how powerful the Israel lobby is in Manitoba ..they carry lots of clout everywhere else..just look how the party's pussyfoot around the subject...laws against speaking out etc . the anti Semitic watchdog agency's....the media control..what is one to do against those odds?Just shutup?